07/10/2008 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The board did not feel that the variance was substantial as it was pre-existing. Neither the neighborhood nor the neighbors would be affected by the addition and nothing can be added to the home without a variance due to the existing setback. Technically the home can be used as it is but the size of the family warrants the addition. Governmental services would not be affected and the spirit of the zoning codes would be upheld granting the owner a variance. lYIrs. Sergi moved, seconded by 1VIs. Rudolph, to grant Robert Gilchrist Jr of 31490 Lorain Roaci 1. A variance from section 1165.02 as an area variance is required 2. Approximately an 8+/- foot variance for a residence too close to the right of way code requires 50' applicant shows approximately 42 +/- feet from the bottom step of front porch which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section 1135.06 (a) and unanimously approved 5-0. Warren &Helen Willits; 5601 Quail Run: (Ward 1) Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of sunroom. The following variance is requested: 1. A 12 foot variance for a residence too close to rear property line code requires 50' applicant shows 38' which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section 1135.08 (a). Mr. & Mrs. Willits the owner, Mr. Round the contractor, Mr. Maloney, Mr. & Mrs. Finch, Mr. Musback and Mr. Harrington, neighbors were each present to be sworn in and address the request. Mr. Round reviewed that the owner who is wheelchair bound can not maneuver the back of the home or declc and would lilce a patio room so he can enjoy his backyard and be protected from the elements. The current deck will be removed and replaced with a sunroom which would have inside access and a ramp for outdoor access. The ramp will be built to code and constructed out of vinyl which requires no maintenance. The home abuts the Croclcer Stearns corridor project which includes a sound wall so there are no rear neighbors. Mr. Maloney read aloud his letter submitted which expressed his support for the neighbor's variance request. Mr. Menser said the sunroom would be a nice addition and appeared to be aesthetically pleasing. Mr. & Mrs. Finch viewed the plans and questioned the location of the ramp. Ms. Rudolph said the ramp would be along the right side of the home. Mr. Musbach asked if it was common for the board to grant variances for sunrooms and questioned if the deck would be removed. Mrs. Diver said that each case is addressed individually and the plans showed the declc removed prior to the sunroom being constructed. Mr. Harrington said he had no objections and supported his neighbor's request. Board members felt that the area would not be affected by the addition and the patio would malce the applicant's backyard more enjoyable. Mrs. Sergi felt the addition would only further enhance the home and neighborhood. As there are no rear neighbors due to the street it would not adversely affect the area. Mrs. Bellido felt that with the street addition the sunroom would ensure the owners could enjoy their baclcyard and not be adversely impacted by the street traffic, noise or fumes. The board felt the property could be used without a variance however the variance will allow the owners to use their property to its fullest extent. The area would not be altered nor would governmental services be affected and the variance was not substantial. It is assumed that owners lcnew zoning laws when purchasing their homes. Neither the sunroom nor the ramp could be installed without a variance and the code would be served granting the variance. Mrs. Sergi moved, seconded by Mr. Menser, to grant Warren & Helen Willits of 5601 Quail Run A 12 foot vaa-iance for a residence too close to rear property line code requires 50' applicant shows 38' which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section 1135.08 (a) and unanimously approved 5-0. NON-12ESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS: 2